Om Auto Wheels vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax Commissionerate
Held
The Court held that the matter was covered by the order passed in Writ Petition No. 345 of 2023, a fact not disputed by the respondents. Consequently, the present writ petition was also decided in terms of the said order. The petitioner was granted liberty to move an application for revocation of the cancellation order under Section 30 of the Central GST Act within two weeks. Along with this application, the petitioner was required to furnish all the GST returns that were not submitted and deposit any outstanding Goods and Service Tax dues. The competent authority was directed to consider the petitioner's application and pass an appropriate order as per law within four weeks thereafter, provided the application was made within the stipulated time. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner's GST registration was cancelled by the Superintendent, CGST, Haldwani, Uttarakhand, on February 27, 2023. The cancellation was based on the ground of non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months. The petitioner attributed this lapse to a communication gap with their tax consultant. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging this order. The respondents, represented by counsel, did not dispute the petitioner's submission that a similar issue had been decided by the Court in another writ petition, WPMS No. 345 of 2023.
Key Issues
1. Whether the GST registration cancellation order, passed by the Superintendent, CGST, Haldwani, on the ground of non-filing of GST returns for six consecutive months, is sustainable in light of the petitioner's explanation of a communication gap with their tax consultant? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the cancellation was due to a communication gap with their tax consultant and that the issue was identical to that decided in WPMS No. 345 of 2023 and other similar writ petitions. They relied on the precedent set in WPMS No. 345 of 2023. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, through their counsel, fairly submitted that the writ petition could be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 345 of 2023, indicating no dispute with the petitioner's assertion that the matter was covered by the prior judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 30
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
`
WPMS No. 850 of 2024
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Ashish Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Sakshi, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the respondents.
GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled by Superintendant, CGST, Haldwani, Sector-3, Uttarakhand vide order dated 27.02.2023 on the ground of non-filing of GST return for six consecutive months. The explanation offered by petitioner is that due to communication gap between him and tax consultant, engaged by petitioner, GST returns could not be filed in time.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical issue has been decided by this Court in Writ Petition No. 345 of 2023 and many other similar writ petitions. This submission is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents, and she, in fact, fairly submits that the writ petition can be decided in terms of the order passed in WPMS No. 345 of 2023. 5. In view of consensus between the parties that matter is cover
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.